Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment of the 22 included studies

From: Prevalence of osteoporosis in patients with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Study

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

TS

QG

Kanazawa,2019

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Maíra Viégas,2011

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

moderate

Abdulameer,2018

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Maryam Ghodsi,2021

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

AL-Homood,2017

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Yan Guo,2020

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Afshinnia MD, 2017

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Yaturu,2009

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Schwartz,2004

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Roma’n,2004

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

moderate

Lingna Fang,2021

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Jianbo Li,2014

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Karimifar,2012

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Bruckner,2014

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Yufeng Li,2020

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Junyan Li,2021

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Min Qiu,2020

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

Shuangling Xiu,2019

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Xiaojuan Xu,2021

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

Yang Wu, 2021

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

high

L. Zhou, 2017

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

moderate

Xueyu Li, 2020

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10

high

  1. Study: first author, Published year; TS, total scores; QG, quality grade;
  2. External validity: Q1-Q4; Internal validity: Q5-Q10
  3. Q1: Was the study’s target population a close representation of the national population in relation to relevant variables?
  4. Q2: Was the sampling frame a true or close representation of the target population?
  5. Q3: Was some form of random selection used to select the sample, or was a census undertaken?
  6. Q4: Was the likelihood of nonresponse bias minimal?
  7. Q5: Were data collected directly from the subjects (as opposed to a proxy)?
  8. Q6: Was an acceptable case definition used in the study?
  9. Q7: Was the study instrument that measured the parameter of interest shown to have validity and reliability?
  10. Q8: Was the same mode of data collection used for all subjects?
  11. Q9: Was the length of the shortest prevalence period for the parameter of interest appropriate?
  12. Q10: Were the numerator(s) and denominator(s) for the parameter of interest appropriate?